Installing software is simpler on Ubuntu than on Windows. With Ubuntu, you don't need to start up a browser or drive to the computer store; it's all right there in the "Ubuntu software center" (i.e. the repositories).
Trade is alwaysmutually beneficial in the long run (otherwise the individuals involved in the trade wouldn't participate), unless abusive monopolies are involved, in which case the free market could become slanted towards them. Since most abusive monopolies are American, I don't understand what you're concerned about.
It's trivial to configure MSOffice to use ODF as the default format when saving documents. The user needs not even be aware that it's set.
ODF produced by Office fails to work properly in any suite other than Office AFAIK, including OOo (as well as e.g. AbiWord, KOffice, Google Docs, etc.). Yet it is supposedly more "compliant" than OOo, due to a variety of technicalities. OTOH, ODF produced by OOo works in almost all of the other major suites. So, yes, it is trivial to do that, but no, it doesn't accomplish anything.
Actually, this is not true. The material the US government produces is not copyrighted, it is in the public domain (domestically, anyway). This means there is NO copyright holder and therefore no possibility of any license agreement with them.
So how's Disney going to screw THIS up for us?
For the time being, the US government is not a wholly owned subsidiary of Disney. So, for now, Disney doesn't care. I suppose they plan to cross that bridge when they come to it...
My question would be, is the energy required to do this more than what you'd lose just sending the power over the same distance using more traditional methods (e.g. power lines)?
Depending on the distance it may require vastly less infrastructure. (e.g. if in ~10n years we send a probe to $planet_or_moon and want to keep it powered without having to rely on dust storms to clean off its solar panels).
They don't ban you for being good at poker because it doesn't hurt them; the house gets a percentage of each pot and doesn't care who wins it. As a matter of fact, they want people to win at poker because it means that:
Said people will probably play again another time.
Said people are free advertising. ("Hey, look at all this money I won at [casino]!")
Then you sue the NPE in an area where it is practicing. And if it practices nowhere, you play the laches card.
Judge in Eastern Texas: "Let's see, he sued you, so he must be right [awards large amount of money]"
That's literally how it works. Do you really think he's going to listen to, of all things, the laches card? (Grammar Nazis:Commas do not belong but were added for clarity)
Not true. First off, I'm just fine with sites providing both h.264 and Theora. The problem is that Firefox wants no h.264 option at all. In other words, they do not want people to be able to use the superior codec. But more to your specific claim, you can use x264 or ffmpeg, no BLOBs, Flash, or system codecs required. It's possible Mozilla may wish to avoid bundling x264 with Firefox in the US, but it can be easily supported as a completely open source plugin the user can install themselves (it can even be integrated in a "click here to install" link just like it does with Flash currently).
ffmpeg is of questionable legality in the US thanks to the DMCA (and/or ACTA?); a simple "click to install" button isn't enough; they would have to have a "click here to install, but don't click here if you live in the US" button or something similar (cf. Ubuntu's "multiverse" repository).
and is not, in practice, any more free for the end-user.
That is provably false. I would go ahead and prove it, but it's been done to death. But the short form: If you encode video with h264 today, in 2016 you may be getting a bill. For my own safety, I can not use h264 video on my website. And if I don't, then iPhone users won't be able to view videos on my website. Etc, etc.
By 2016 In re Bilski will have eliminated software patents entirely.
You are probably not a lawyer. IANAL. Anyone who wants to break his/her contract should consult a real lawyer, who will in turn consult the contract and determine whether this is feasible. Contract might contain language like "Rogers reserves the right to suspend access to The Services under X circumstances... [You can't break the contract just because] Rogers has suspended Your access to The Services...[etc]".
Android doesn't come with root. It comes with the ability to install your own apps without having to jump through some lame "app store" or other technical/political hoops.
Slashdot Mirror
Installing software is simpler on Ubuntu than on Windows. With Ubuntu, you don't need to start up a browser or drive to the computer store; it's all right there in the "Ubuntu software center" (i.e. the repositories).
Trade is always mutually beneficial in the long run (otherwise the individuals involved in the trade wouldn't participate), unless abusive monopolies are involved, in which case the free market could become slanted towards them. Since most abusive monopolies are American, I don't understand what you're concerned about.
It's trivial to configure MSOffice to use ODF as the default format when saving documents. The user needs not even be aware that it's set.
ODF produced by Office fails to work properly in any suite other than Office AFAIK, including OOo (as well as e.g. AbiWord, KOffice, Google Docs, etc.). Yet it is supposedly more "compliant" than OOo, due to a variety of technicalities. OTOH, ODF produced by OOo works in almost all of the other major suites. So, yes, it is trivial to do that, but no, it doesn't accomplish anything.
Actually, this is not true. The material the US government produces is not copyrighted, it is in the public domain (domestically, anyway). This means there is NO copyright holder and therefore no possibility of any license agreement with them.
So how's Disney going to screw THIS up for us?
For the time being, the US government is not a wholly owned subsidiary of Disney. So, for now, Disney doesn't care. I suppose they plan to cross that bridge when they come to it...
[from sig line]
--
STOP THE COLLIDER
I can't tell whether this guy is more or less kooky than the time cube guy. He's slightly more coherent anyway.
ObMAFIAA:Yes, an international, corporate meta-State would suck.
Politicians make the laws. They can't just shrug and say "The courts already decided the issue".
The comm. minister "wanting" something != "making the laws"
So "teleport" is misleading since you cannot transmit power any faster than information, and that has to travel at the speed of light at most (as far as we know (this week anyway) anyway).
My question would be, is the energy required to do this more than what you'd lose just sending the power over the same distance using more traditional methods (e.g. power lines)?
Depending on the distance it may require vastly less infrastructure. (e.g. if in ~10n years we send a probe to $planet_or_moon and want to keep it powered without having to rely on dust storms to clean off its solar panels).
So why is Google bothering with Chrome OS then?
What's this then? The 10th Amendment is part of the Constitution.
Gamma(e+1) That's irrational!
FTFY. "!" only works on whole numbers. Unfortunately /.'s UTF-8 support sucks or else I would have put up a real Gamma. </rant>
They don't ban you for being good at poker because it doesn't hurt them; the house gets a percentage of each pot and doesn't care who wins it. As a matter of fact, they want people to win at poker because it means that:
Then you sue the NPE in an area where it is practicing. And if it practices nowhere, you play the laches card.
Judge in Eastern Texas: "Let's see, he sued you, so he must be right [awards large amount of money]"
That's literally how it works. Do you really think he's going to listen to, of all things, the laches card? (Grammar Nazis:Commas do not belong but were added for clarity)
Not true. First off, I'm just fine with sites providing both h.264 and Theora. The problem is that Firefox wants no h.264 option at all. In other words, they do not want people to be able to use the superior codec. But more to your specific claim, you can use x264 or ffmpeg, no BLOBs, Flash, or system codecs required. It's possible Mozilla may wish to avoid bundling x264 with Firefox in the US, but it can be easily supported as a completely open source plugin the user can install themselves (it can even be integrated in a "click here to install" link just like it does with Flash currently).
ffmpeg is of questionable legality in the US thanks to the DMCA (and/or ACTA?); a simple "click to install" button isn't enough; they would have to have a "click here to install, but don't click here if you live in the US" button or something similar (cf. Ubuntu's "multiverse" repository).
and is not, in practice, any more free for the end-user.
That is provably false. I would go ahead and prove it, but it's been done to death. But the short form: If you encode video with h264 today, in 2016 you may be getting a bill. For my own safety, I can not use h264 video on my website. And if I don't, then iPhone users won't be able to view videos on my website. Etc, etc.
By 2016 In re Bilski will have eliminated software patents entirely.
[snip a lot]called FoSS users "freetards"[snip some more]
I believe by "freetard" he meant FSF-like, not Linux-Foundation-et-al.-like.
Fact is no software is safe with software patents. Especially in the US where everything is just let though.
Not for much longer
There is a direct three-way correlation between use of IE, stupidity, and security problems .
Whether that is also a causation, and if so which way it runs, has yet to be established.
Fixed that for me.
There is a direct three-way correlation between use of IE, stupidity, and security.
Whether that is also a causation, and if so which way it runs, has yet to be established.
You are probably not a lawyer. IANAL. Anyone who wants to break his/her contract should consult a real lawyer, who will in turn consult the contract and determine whether this is feasible. Contract might contain language like "Rogers reserves the right to suspend access to The Services under X circumstances... [You can't break the contract just because] Rogers has suspended Your access to The Services...[etc]".
Obvious solution: cell networks shouldn't be closed systems in the first place.
Android doesn't come with root. It comes with the ability to install your own apps without having to jump through some lame "app store" or other technical/political hoops.
AT&T provided such confirmation in its letter to the FCC.
INCONCEIVABLE!! ;)
That word... I don't think it means what you think it means.
We have freedom of expression as long as that expression is not a direct threat, or as long as it is not libel.
FTFY.